User:CiretheHistoryMan/Discrimination against Mayans in Guatemala

Mayan oppression from 1996 to present
While the 1996 Peace Accords ended decades of armed conflict in Guatemala, it did not bring a complete end to oppression for the Mayan peoples. Although the Peace Accords stressed increased participation of the Mayan peoples in governmental processes, according to researcher Nicholas Copeland, Mayans have still been less inclined to participate in progressive movements than their other indigenous counterparts throughout the Americas. Those that do participate in these progressive movements, even with the help of NGOs and INGOs, face threats of state and parastate violence. However, a report by Global Americans in 2017 argued that this lack of political representation for indigenous people in Guatemala is mainly due to internal strife, stating that "tensions between and within the left in Guatemala (which exist to this day) are undoubtedly responsible for the UNRG’s lack of electoral success." Only 19 Mayans were reported to have served in Guatemala's Congress during the 2016-2020 legislative term.

Furthermore, there are social disparities that remain in Guatemalan society as of 2008. A study conducted in 2014 regarding the wealth gap within Guatemala reported that 75% of the indigenous population of Guatemala is still poor, with 30% living in extreme poverty. Alongside this, there has been an increase in criminal violence and lynching in Mayan communities as of 2007. While some argue that this increase in lynching is die to indigenous customary law, others believe that the lynchings have been brought about by a lack of trust in the police and justice systems within Guatemala. This has led to a wave of immigration of Mayan youth from Guatemala to the United States.

The Pan-Mayan Movement
Although oppression still continues, some Mayans have found support from the Pan-Mayan Movement. The Pan-Mayan Movement is motivated by Pan-Mayanism. Other names for the movement include the "Maya Movement," "Mayan Revitalization Movement" and "Movimiento Maya '' (as the indigenous peoples call it). The Pan Mayan Movement is said to represent the "organized Mayan," which is one of the reasons that the movement faces backlash from the Mayan community. This movement was one of the leading organizations representing the Mayan community during the peace accords.

The Pan-Mayan movement has three groups of leaders: the elders, the second generation, and the third generation. The elders were born before the Civil War and received educations that consisted of their indigenous ethnic consciousness. The Second generation was born at the beginning of the Guatemalan Civil War and were in charge during the peace accords. The third generation was born during the arguably most brutal years of the civil war (the 70s to 80s). Each group has different agendas for the Pan Mayan movement, which has led to disunification within the movement. Kyrie Anne Kowalick argues that, for these reasons, the Pan-Mayan movement has been unsuccessful in creating economic and political stability for the Mayan peoples.

Another question that has risen from the Pan-Mayan movement is whether the movement should focus on growing the Mayan identity or the Mayan popularity. Those that support growth of the Mayan identity support the strengthening of the Mayan culture. Those who support the growth of the Mayan popularity focus on political questions that are more than expressions of the Mayan ethnicity. Because of this disagreement in how the movement should be led as a whole, some Mayans choose to solely act within their own communities.

Environmental and Land Struggles
In the mid-1990s, the Mayan communities’ right to manage and protect communal forests was challenged by widespread illegal logging, which environmentalists and local Mayan authorities viewed as a threat to the survival of the forest and, by extension, their own resources and way of life. In response, the Mayan Association of Five Parcialidades joined forces with the municipality to form new associations aimed at protecting water committees and preserving communal lands.

There have also been struggles for Mayans to hold onto their ancestral land. In 1989, more than 500 Mayan-Mam families in the Cajola community demanded for land called the Pampas del Horizonte, land that was stripped from the community to make way for the coffee economy back in 1884. The families stated that the land not only was based on legal titles, but based on Mam culture and historical heritages in which the land is a symbol of past struggles. Three major movements have since been attempted prior to the 1989 demand, but only a certain amount was redistributed and local power brokers maintained parts of the land. After an occupation of a farm in 1990 and initial state response with the presence of anti riot police, the government granted them Cajola community land on January 1, 1991, though only 89 families were given land with no water, housing or latrines.

Unsatisfied, Cajolnese families occupied the Coatunco farm again, but after the police burned temporary homes that they set up and “evicted” them on June 15, 1992, the families worked with activists to march to the capital so that they could protest at the public square. Heavy armed security forces and an anti riot squad attacked the families and activists with clubs, guns and tear gas, with the women being attacked more. As a result of pressure from human rights organizations, the government presented a loan for the families to purchase the Santo Domingo farm, which the families accepted and moved in on December 23, 1992. Unfortunately Nueva Cajola, the name of the new community, would suffer from Hurricane Mitch, growing debt amidst a globalizing economy and lack of substantial necessities that the government still hasn’t provided.

Another case occurred in March 2011 when more than 800 Maya-Q'eqchi families were forcibly removed from their homes in the Polochic River region.The Widmann Lagarde family claimed that they owned the land despite the questionable techniques to acquire it, and after they received new funds from the Central American Economic Integration Bank to operate their sugar refineries, they began violent displacement to remove the communities. Homes were destroyed by bulldozers, hectares of crops were burned, families were harmed by tear gas and a community member Antonio Beb Ac was killed. This ties to the larger conflict of displacement and dispossession of the Franja Transversal Norte region that occurs from increasing development over indigenous land. When Mayan communities lose their land, they lose basic housing and basic food security. Development projects and agribusiness also do not account for environmental consequences such as soil depletion and desertification, as well as pollution that affect local water supplies, wildlife and forest nutrition, which further harms communities in the region.

Cultural and Structural Challenges
Efforts by the Mayan communities to form alliances and protect communal lands from privatization were indicative of the cultural and structural challenges they faced. These efforts were often met with opposition from influential local and external entities, reflecting a persistent pattern of discrimination against the Mayans. This resistance is emblematic of the broader struggle for indigenous rights and self-governance within the framework of Guatemala’s legal and political systems.